What You'll Learn

  • The four elements 4. Severe distress
  • Intent and recklessness 5. Third-person claims
  • Extreme and outrageous conduct

Educational information only; not legal advice. This article is a general study aid and should be checked against current authority and course materials.

1. The Four Required Elements

Intent or recklessness

The defendant desired distress or consciously disregarded a substantial risk that severe distress would result.

Extreme and outrageous conduct

The behavior must be atrocious and intolerable in a civilized community.

Causation

The conduct must actually cause the emotional injury claimed.

Severe emotional distress

Ordinary embarrassment, annoyance, or transient upset is not enough.

Key Takeaway

Serious threats used to coerce payment supported liability for emotional distress even when the facts did not fit traditional assault. The claim captured severe injury from extreme intimidation.

2. Intent or Recklessness

IIED does not always require a purpose to produce emotional harm. Recklessness can satisfy the mental-state element when the defendant knows of a substantial risk of severe distress and acts in conscious disregard of that risk.

3. Outrageousness Is a High Threshold

Not enough: ordinary insults, discourtesy, bad manners, or petty oppression. Potentially enough: serious threats, prolonged harassment, coercion, or exploitation that a community would regard as intolerable. Context controls: relationship, repetition, vulnerability, and the defendant's knowledge can affect how conduct is characterized.

Key Takeaway

A rude insult did not become IIED merely because the plaintiff experienced a serious reaction. The conduct itself must cross the extreme-and-outrageous threshold.

4. Distress Must Be Severe

The plaintiff must establish a severely disabling or otherwise serious emotional response. The outlines distinguish real, substantial distress from hurt feelings. Bodily harm can strengthen proof but is not always required by the basic formulation.

Key Takeaway

Repeated mockery of a stutter was offensive, but the plaintiff still had to prove severe emotional distress. The intensity of the response is a separate element from outrageous conduct.

5. Conduct Directed at a Third Person

The Restatement formulation recognizes limited third-person claims when outrageous conduct is directed at someone else. Presence and relationship matter.

Plaintiff Additional requirements

Immediate family member present at the time Intentional or reckless causation of severe distress; bodily harm is not necessarily required under the stated rule.

Other person present at the time The distress must result in bodily harm under the stated third-person formulation.

Person who learns about the event later Ordinarily outside the presence-based third-person rule.

Key Takeaway

Witnessing an attack on a family member did not establish IIED when the defendant lacked the required intent or knowledge with respect to the bystander's distress.

6. Exam Checklist

1 Identify the exact conduct and its context; avoid conclusory labels. 2 Show purpose or recklessness as to severe emotional distress. 3 Explain why the behavior is beyond insults and ordinary conflict. 4 Prove causation and severe distress with concrete facts. 5 For third-person claims, analyze presence, family relationship, and bodily harm where required.

Common Mistake

Do not infer outrageousness from the severity of the plaintiff's reaction. Conduct and injury are separate elements.

Primary Authorities

  • Restatement (Second) of Torts Sec. 46 (intentional or reckless infliction of severe emotional distress).

  • State Rubbish Collectors Ass'n v. Siliznoff.

  • Slocum v. Food Fair Stores of Florida and Harris v. Jones.

  • Taylor v. Vallelunga (third-person distress and intent).

Exam-ready conclusion

IIED is a demanding catch-all tort. Strong answers prove a culpable mental state, genuinely intolerable conduct, a causal link, and severe distress instead of relying on adjectives.